Labels:book | reckoner | sky | tree OCR: The court of appeals also held that the seizure of Good's home 21 U.5. $881 violated the Due Process Clause because the statute did not provide for notice and an oppon nity for a hearing before the seizure The court distinguished cases which upheld the seizure personal property forfei- tre without prior notice and hearing because these all involvert property that was easily Applying the balancing text uf Mathews Eldridge 424 U.S. 319 (1976) the court held that the importance of the home. pue the fact that the Kadord would stil] be available for forfeiture hearing tipped the balance tr favor of providing notice and hearing It. further noted that govemment': interest ir preventing of the property could be achievexi pendens and other means less restrictive God' s rights than outright seizure ...
(.png)
